HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10/09/2024 PUBLIC HEARING
October 9, 2024
Present: Matt Scherr Chairman
Jeanne McQueeney Commissioner
Kathy Chandler-Henry Commissioner
Beth Oliver County Attorney
Kathy Scriver Deputy Clerk to the Board
This being a scheduled Public Hearing,the following items were presented to the Board of County
Commissioners for their consideration:
Planning File - Eagle County Room
1. PR-009447-2024 Warner Building Special Use Permit Extension#2
Janet Aluise, Community Development
Executive Summary: The purpose of the public hearing is to consider an extension to a Special Use Permit
approved in 2019 as Resolution 2019-070,to include the remodel of a commercial building into a 35-bedroom
boarding house,with common kitchen,manager's unit, and shared bathrooms. The application is subject to
change from time to time.
Title: Warner Building Special Use Permit(SUP)Extension#2
File No.: PR-009447-2024
Location: 20 Eagle Road(Parcel#2103-172-33-008),EagleVail area
Applicant: 20 Eagle Road 2A LLC
Owner: Same
Representative: Michael Barry and Matthew Barry,Principles
Staff Planner: Janet Aluise, Senior Planner
Staff Report Summary:
On or about June 7, 2024,20 Eagle Road 2A LLC (the"Applicant") submitted a request for a second two(2)year
extension of a Special Use Permit previously approved via Resolution No. 2019-070 (the"Application") for the
conversion of an office building to a 35-unit boarding house(the"SUP")on a 0.48 acre parcel at 20 Eagle Road in
the EagleVail Planned Unit Development,otherwise known as parcel no. 2103-172-33-008 and the Warner
Professional Building#2 (the"Property"). A Finding of No Significant Impact(FONSI) in lieu of a 1041 permit
was administratively approved for the SUP in March of 2019(File No. 1041-7818). The Board of County
Commissioners("Board")approved the SUP via Resolution 2019-070 on August 13,2019. The approval was
scheduled to expire on August 13, 2022, and the Applicant applied for an extension of the SUP on July 12,2022.
The Board approved a two-year extension of the SUP approval on November 9,2022,thereby extending the SUP
approval through August 13,2024. The current Application is a request for a second two-year extension of the SUP
approval to allow for construction and implementation of the boarding use. This request for a second extension was
made on June 7,2024,more than thirty(30)days prior to the expiration of the permit, in compliance with Section
5-250.G.3.b. of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations ("ECLUR"). The SUP is deemed extended until the Board
hears and acts on the Application for the SUP extension. Approval of a final or consolidated special use permit shall
be voided and extinguished unless the applicant can demonstrate by competent substantial evidence that the failure
1
10/09/2024
to proceed with the development of the application was(1)beyond the applicant's control; (2)the development
complies with these Land Use Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan; and(3)there is a reasonable likelihood the
next step in the development application will be submitted in the next two years. If the Board does not grant the
second request for an extension of the special use permit, it will expire effective August 13,2024.A hearing on the
request for a second extension of the SUP was scheduled for August 6, 2024; however,at that time,the Applicant
requested to table the Application to October 9, 2024,in order to provide more information to the Board.
Extension requests may be granted by the Board of County Commissioners for any period of time up to two years
and for an unlimited number of times. Pursuant to ECLUR Section 5-250.G.3.b -Extension of Special Use Permit
Approval, such requests are granted only after the Board has made a positive finding that: 1. Failure to proceed
with the development was beyond the applicant's control;2. The development complies with the Eagle County
Land Use Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan, and; 3. There is a reasonable likelihood that the next step in
the development application will be submitted in the next two (2)years.
By requesting an extension of the Special Use Permit for an additional period of two years,the Applicant is also
requesting an extension of vested rights for a period of two years. By way of example,the two-year extension of
both the Special Use Permit and the Vested Rights was granted to August 13, 2024,and a subsequent extension, if
approved,would allow for an extension to August 13, 2026.
Janet Aluise,Eagle County Staff Planner, stated that this was the applicant's second extension request for
this project. The application was approved back in 2019 for boarding house use. The Special Use Permit(SUP)
would have expired on August 13,2024,had this hearing not been scheduled. The applicant would give their
presentation, and then staff would present their findings.
Michael Barry stated that he and his family purchased the building two years ago. They thought that
everything was a done deal and they would be able to start constructing the boarding house. They didn't realize
there were several moving parts, so over the last few years,they'd learned a lot.'They submitted plans two years
ago and were waiting for approval from EagleVail Property Owners Association(EVPOA).
Ms. Aluise stated that the property was located at 20 Eagle Road in EagleVail. The surrounding land uses
included single-family, commercial, and open space. The existing parcel zoning was EagleVail PUD, and the
acreage attributable to this use was 0.48 acres,with 0.93 acres for the entire site. The access was through US
Highway 6 and Eagle Road. The,Board needed to determine whether the SUP should be extended an additional
two years. The commercial building conversion to a boarding house included a 10,000 sq. ft.building for 30
single occupancy rooms, five double occupancy rooms, a managers unit, a community room, a large kitchen, and
shared bathrooms for every 2.5 rooms. The rooms were intended to be master leased,with no short-term rentals.
There were three standards for an extension request. The applicant had indicated that they had extensive talks
with the EVPOA and would continue to do so. Staff believed that the applicant had diligently pursued approval
by the EagleVail Design Review Committee but had not gotten approval as of yet. The applicant had submitted a
building permit application to the County in September of 2023,but the county was unable to issue the permit
because the plans indicated noncompliance with the resolution because there were bathrooms for each bedroom
instead of shared bathrooms as the resolution indicated. The applicant agreed to submit another building permit
application in compliance with the resolution. Nothing had changed in the Eagle County Land Use Regulations,
the Comprehensive Plan, or the application that would cause concern for staff. Staff believed the application did
conform to the Comprehensive Plan and was in compliance with the LURs. Staff believed that there was a
reasonable likelihood that the project would continue and expected that the applicant would resolve any legal
disputes with the EagleVail DRC and obtain a building permit within two years.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked Mr. Barry to talk about the two-year timeline and how likely he felt
they would get approval from the EagleVail POA DRC, given that things had been contentious over the last four
years.
Mr. Barry stated that the construction timeline could be completed in four to six months.
2
10/09/2024
Rob Sperbert, attorney for the applicant, stated that the issue was that the EVPOA felt that a boarding
house did not comply with their declaration. However,this was despite the fact that in 2021,they amended the
PUD rezoning of the property,which included permission to build a boarding house through special review. He
believed the court's decision should resolve the matter within three to four months.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry stated that the staff report indicated that staff was recommending
approval with conditions,but she did not see any conditions.
Ms. Aluise stated that there were no conditions; it was a typo.
Chairman Scherr opened public comment.
Karl Kruegar believed that there were major errors in the staff report. The new table that showed
adjacencies was incorrect;there were no single-family homes around the Warner Building. He stated that the
entrance was not off US Highway 6, and Eagle Road was not included in the diagram. The site indicated a single
parcel,but six parcels were being changed to a boarding house. There was no indication of how the .46 property
was calculated. The staff report misrepresented that the applicant diligently pursued a EVDRC approval as there
was no proof of that. A boarding house was not an accepted use. The landscape buffers required for commercial
lots was a minimum of 10 ft. This was about 6 ft. and the applicant wished to cut it in half to 3 ft. Essentially,the
County approved the building that did not have enough parking. He added that there was a limit to spending on a
remodel of a building that was non-conforming.
Chairman Scherr closed public comment.
Ms. Aluise stated with regards to the adjacent land uses, staff identified duplex units as single-family
units. Staff generally does not include rights of way when talking about adjacent land uses, so across the right of
way was the open space,as mentioned in the table. The .48 acres was calculated in the first application and in the
public notification for the first application in 2019. It would be irregular for staff to change that number at this
point. Staff offered a site plan to confirm that the .48 acres was valid. Regarding the DRC approval,the applicant
shared some correspondence with staff that indicated they did try to obtain DRC approval. Staff believed that the
applicant had done what was needed in both submitting a building permit, even though it wasn't quite right and in
applying to the DRC. Lot 19 was no longer a duplex lot as the condominium plat in 1983 changed the
designation to general common element. The parking lot had been in existence since 1983 or shortly after the
building was constructed. The landscaping plan would be reviewed at the time of building permit,but in the
initial approval the landscaping was approved by the board, as much was existing. There was mention of
additional landscaping between buildings one and two, and staff would make sure that it occurred should the site
plan for a building permit come in that they could approve. The drawings were not included in the packet
because this was not a reopening of this application. This was just a request to extend the timeline for two years;
the applicant had to resolve the issues, obtain the DRC letter, and obtain a building permit to institute the use.
The public comment regarding the idea that the planning staff did not represent the citizens was false. Staff were
doing their best to ensure that the standards were met. As far as the limitation on the amount of money spent on
renovations,this was a non-conforming building,but with the special use permit approved in 2019,this was a
change in use, so the applicant was not capped on the 15% spending on the assessed valuation of the building.
Beth Oliver,County Attorney added that the 15%cap was related to routine repair and maintenance.
With regard to this proposed special use,the language that staff relied on in 2019 said that a non-conforming
structure should not be extended or expanded to increase the non-conformity. The exterior renovations did not
increase the non-conformity. In the EagleVail PUD guide,there was language that said that Eagle County shall
not issue any building permit that involved a change to the exterior appearance of any building with EagleVail
DRB approval. This is why there was talk of the issuance of the letter and why it had been withheld and become
an issue.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry wondered if there was no issuance of a letter.
Ms. Oliver stated this was why the applicant had filed with the court and hoped to have a determination
made by the court as to whether that letter should be issued or not or why the DRC had withheld it. One letter via
3
10/09/2024
email was received for public comment about two minutes before 3:00 p.m., so she wondered if the board wished
to take a five-minute break to review the email.
Chairman Scherr stated that the board would take a short break to review the information.
Mr. Sperberg stated that the comments related to the prior submittal had been withdrawn. The new
submittal would comply with the resolution in the sense that there would be shared bathrooms.
Ms. Oliver added that the building permit reviews referenced in the letter were irrelevant because the
application had been withdrawn.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry stated that she concurred with the staff report,and the applicant had
demonstrated that the delay was beyond the applicant's control. There were no changes, so the previous findings
of compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Regulations were met. She believed all three
standards had been met.
Commissioner McQueeney agreed with Commissioner Chandler-Henry; this was very straightforward.
She believed that the applicant was diligently trying to proceed.
Chairman Scherr agreed with his fellow commissioners that the application met all three of the standards.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved to approve the Application for a second extension of the approval
of the special use permit for Warner Professional Building#2 Special Use permit Extension#2,File No.
PR-009447-2024, incorporating staff's findings, as the Application meets the standards of ECLUR Section
5-250.G.3.b. for approval of an Extension to a Special Use Permit.
Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous.
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned until October 11,2024.
/ ro
Attest: L. 0 r r1/4 fr)
Clerk to the Board Chairm
4
10/09/2024
